Blair, Gates OK Multi-Billion Secret Sats

Blair, Gates OK Multi-Billion Secret Sats

UPDATED: With Confirmation, Explanation by DNI spokeswoman

DNI spokeswoman Vanee Vines confirmed April 2 that the DNI and Defense Secretary approved the “next generation electro-optical satellites.” Vines said the decision was “based on the results of multiple panels and studies conducted over the last several years…” She said the DNI was “working to ensure we can continue to provide deep insights” into world events for the president and military forces, a clear reference to the possibility of a gap in the American eletroc-optical constellation. Vines would not discuss the costs or schedule of the proposed satellite system.

President Barack Obama is expected to approve a new constellation of highly classified multi-billion dollar spy satellites in the next few days, injecting a major new expenditure into the Defense Department budget that was not planned when the administration began its budget deliberations.

The debate between the intelligence community and the military over this system has been particularly sharp. In the words of one Hill source familiar with the issue. “A deep path has been worn between the Pentagon and the White House on this one,” the source said.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair signed a classified memo approving the program on March 30, according to two sources familiar with the program. Details of the program are highly classified. A DNI spokesman had not responded by the time we posted this story but may provide details later.

However, we have obtained a few details in the meantime.

The system may cost $3.5 billion to get started, if earlier estimates are accurate. It may cost up to $10 billion, over the next five years depending on which technical approach was approved and on how many satellites will be built.

The Hill source said that the DNI and Pentagon would have great trouble paying for the system. “I don’t think they can come up with enough to pay for two-plus-two,” the source said, refusing to add any details.

This is what led to the decision to approve the new system. Blair commissioned a group, led by Paul Kaminski, former undersecretary of Defense for acquisition and technology, to tell him whether the US faces a capabilities gap as aging satellites die and the US continues to fail to put new ones into orbit. While there is vigorous disagreement within Congress, DoD and the intelligence community as to whether there really be a gap that needs to be filled, the official consensus seems to be that the country cannot afford the risk.

Kaminski and his panel, “basically said, we want everything, a robust constellation,” according to one source familiar with the discussions. In the coded language that the intelligence community uses dealing with people who aren’t cleared, this means that Blair is pushing an “exquisite” solution. And that means it’s a really technologically advanced satellite with big and expensive optics able to deliver the rarest and finest strategic intelligence to the president. “We are asking for the Rolex,” said our source. This source does not believe the country needs what the DNI wants: “We are chasing what we want, rather than what we need.”

A former government official with experience of space programs was sharply critical of the DNI’s approach: “The panel recommendations appear to be another triumph of over-the-top programs that seek performance beyond reasonable need. The costs are astronomical in terms of dollars, risk, and missed opportunities. Though I highly respect the panel members, at some point we should ask ourselves whether it’s wise to rely exclusively on ‘greybeards’ when considering the kind of changes required in this post-Cold War era.

All this echoes comments made recently by Marine Gen. James Cartwright, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, that the country does not need exquisite systems and Cartwright is a major player in the debate about what electro-optical satellites need building. For example, he was present when Gates was briefed.

The Pentagon and DNI will pull money from across all of DoD and the intelligence community. Pentagon funding will not come from the space budget (black or white).

There may be one big flaw in the plan currently being considered: it completely ignores US policy that requires the government use commercial data whenever possible. A senior Defense Department official said the current constellation would not include any commercial satellites or any money to buy commercial data from the two American companies that have satellites in orbit.

DoDBuzz readers have known about this effort from the beginning when we broke the story about the failed effort by the last DNI, Mike McConnell, to try and stuff $3.5 billion into the recently passed financial rescue supplemental. The money would have gone to build at least one of these satellites. Some $300 million of it would have gone to buy commercial data on the side.

In the latest effort, Kaminski and his panel of so-called greybeards have briefed Blair and Gates. Kaminski spoke two weeks ago with the tiny coterie of Hill aides who determine intelligence spending and policy. Apparently, he told them little beyond how the process worked and the broad outlines of his plan. But the Hill aides, who have been very frustrated with the slow pace and uncertain course of both the Pentagon and intelligence community on the electro-optical constellation, reportedly told Kaminski they will support the way ahead as long as somebody actually takes a decision and does something.

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

Join the Conversation

“There may be one big flaw in the plan currently being considered: it completely ignores US policy that requires the government use commercial data whenever possible.”

No, it doesn’t “completely ignore” anything. The policy says that you use commercial data whenever possible. Key phrase here being “whenever possible”. When you’re dealing with strategic intelligence, it isn’t.

See, the thing is, in the strat-intel world, EVERYTHING is a piece of information. Not just the content of the picture, but the mere *existence* of the picture. You can’t just buy “every image ever taken at all times” from a commercial provider–they have other customers than just the NGIA. So you’re forced to target your interest to specific areas, which immediately tells people what you’re looking at. “Can I buy some sat imagery of Novaya Zemlya?” “No, the US NGIA bought all of it.” “hmmmm…is that so? (picks up phone) Cheese it, comrades, they’re on to us!”

*****

No surprise that Cartwright is involved in trashing this. The guy never saw an advanced program he didn’t hate. I’m sure that, secretly, he’s one of those guys who’s still VERY VERY UPSET that they made him trade in his M14.

*****

“A former government official with experience of space programs was sharply critical of the DNI’s approach…”

Ah-heh. You can have “experience of space programs” and still not know a damn thing about overhead strategic-intel EO. There is a reason for the level of capability being requested.

The problem is that everyone’s acting like the current war is the only thing worth spending any money on ever. Should we have the CIA stop funding intel activites that aren’t focused directly on Iraq and Afghanistan? Should we sink the Coast Guard because they aren’t involved in those theaters? Eighty-six any non-deployed National Guard or Army Reserves? Hey, we aren’t using those Minutemen or Tridents to fight in the desert–scrap ‘em!

The primary use for commercial data is for sharing with other “partners” that may not be DOD cleared (ie, coast guard, FBI, National Guard, DEA, etc). The intelligence obtained may be interpreted from classified means, but portrayed on unclassified imagery as to make a unclassified product to be shared.

DensityDuck said:
“You can have “experience of space programs” and still not know a damn thing about overhead strategic-intel EO“
YOU ARE SO RIGHT!!

Unless you have worked ‚as an analyst, with past or current constellations of our classified satellites and understand their capabilities, you should not be nay-saying an upgrade to the capabilities that will allow the IC to provide both the IC and the DOD partners with the needed intel as well as new products well into the future.

Instead of referring to this solution as the “Rolex” of all solutions … think of it as the IC’s long awaited “Bail Out” that is over due. Ha Ha!

So not only do we need to see a truck in front of a building, we need to be able to read the VIN number now?

I thought the trend was to go back to using more field operators rther than better images?

I’m not opposed to buying good equipment as long as we need it and it works.

I wonder how many field operators and UAV’s the CIA could fund with $10 billion?

In a time of global economic stress, “exquisite” sensing systems must take a back seat to “required” sensing systems. This kind of largesse is what gets the Defense budget in trouble with thinking people.
A more rational approach would be to replace obsolescent systems with satellites with true longevity and multi-purpose design. Ones that can be continuously upgraded to enhanced capabilities through software uplinks and Space Shuttle visits.

headline: Adjectives to be cut in new budget.

This is trying to revive the B.A.S.I.C. program. The issue is that it will kill companies that rely on the promise of imagery sales. The prospects for GEOEYE and DIGITALGLOBE will die and two more companies will go by the wayside.

Kind of goes hand in hand with he new administrations plans to take over companies, fire CEO’s and now kill companies.

Do we really need it? NO, but we really want it.

In traditional journalism, the reporter would tell readers who or what “Blair” is, or perhaps provide a first name as a clue. “Gates” is presumably Robert Gates, the US Secretary of Defense.

Helen,

This isn’t exactly traditional journalism but I take your point and made the changes. The full names and titles can be useful, especially for those who don’t pay much attention to the intelligence world (most of our readers know the military pretty well).

Please keep an eagle eye on us and fire when needed!

Whether its need or want, I don’t know. Wat happens if an enemy sets off an EMP, or, hacks into our computers, our power grid, or tries to shoot them down? I hope there are contingencies or safeguards in place, those sats won’t be worth a dime if they are not protected.

*required

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement